Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T01:48:03.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Surface Enrichment in Polymer Blends: Simple Theory and an Experimental Test

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2011

R.A.L. Jones ,
E.J. Kramer ,
M.H. Rafailovich ,
J. Sokolov  and
S.A. Schwarz
R.A.L. Jones
Affiliation:
Dept of Materials Science and Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca NY 14853
E.J. Kramer
Affiliation:
Dept of Materials Science and Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca NY 14853
M.H. Rafailovich
Affiliation:
Dept of Physics, Queens College, 65-30 Kissena Blvd, Flushing NY 11367
J. Sokolov
Affiliation:
Dept of Physics, Queens College, 65-30 Kissena Blvd, Flushing NY 11367
S.A. Schwarz
Affiliation:
Bellcore, Red Bank, NJ 07701-7040
Get access

Extract

If a polymer mixture which is in the bulk one-phase region is next to an interface - this may be with another polymer, with a non-polymeric solid, or with the air - the composition of the mixture at the interface will be different from the bulk [1-4]. There are two questions we would like to understand: what determines the composition of the mixture at the interface, and how does that composition increment decay back to the bulk value. This surface or interface segregation has important practical consequences; in the surface case such segregation will profoundly affect wettability, with consequences for the strength of adhesive joints and the biocompatibility of polymeric surgical implants, as well as influencing friction and wear; at interfaces with non-polymers segregation is important for the adhesion of mixed polymer phases to non-polymer phases such as reinforcing fibres or fillers. In this paper we describe some experiments on surface segregation in a very well characterised model system and we describe a recent theory that can be quantitatively tested by our data. We will consider the consequences of this new understanding of surface segregation in polymer mixtures, and we will argue that many of these conclusions may be carried over to the more general case of interface segregation, which opens up a number of interesting technological possibilities.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 153: Symposium J – Interfaces Between Polymers, Metals, and Ceramics , 1989 , 133
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Bhatia, Q.S., Pan, D.H. and Koberstein, J.T., Macromolecules 21 2166 (1988)Google Scholar
2. Jones, R.A.L., Kramer, E.J., Rafailovich, M.H., Sokolov, J., Schwarz, S.A., Phys.Rev.Lett. 62 280 (1989)Google Scholar
3. Shull, K.R., Kramer, E.J., Hadziioannou, G., Tang, W., Bull. of the APS 34 704 (1989)Google Scholar
4. Lipatov, Yu S., Khramova, T.S., Todosijchuk, T.T., Gudova, E.G., J.Colloid &Interface Science 123 143 (1988)Google Scholar
5. Bates, F. S., Wignall, G. D. and Koehler, W. C., Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 2425 (1985)Google Scholar
6. Bates, F.S. and Wignall, G.D., Phys.Rev.Lett. 57 1429 (1986)Google Scholar
7. Bartell, L.S. and Roskos, R.R., J.Chem.Phys. 44 457 (1966)Google Scholar
8. Sokolov, J., Rafailovich, M.H., Jones, R.A.L., Kramer, E.J., Appl. Phys.Lett. 54 590 (1989)Google Scholar
9. Composto, R.C., Stein, R.S., Jones, R.A.L., Kramer, E.J., Felcher, G.P., Karim, A., Mansour, A., Physica B 156&157 434 (1989)Google Scholar
10. Russell, T.P., Private communicationGoogle Scholar
11. Cahn, J.W., J.Chem.Phys 66 3367 (1977)Google Scholar
12. Rowlinson, J.S. and Widom, B., Molecular Theory of Capillarity, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1982 Google Scholar
13. Nakanishi, H. and Pincus, P., J.Chem.Phys. 79 997 (1983)Google Scholar
14. Schmidt, I. and Binder, K., J. Physique (Paris), 46 1631 (1985)Google Scholar